1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates generally to systems for recording audio and video (A/V) and for playback of same. More particularly, the invention relates to a method and system for A/V capturing, recording, streaming, videoconferencing and for live and on-demand playback. The capture function of the system and method is often referred to as “event capture” generally and sometimes more specifically as, “lecture capture” and “deposition capture” among types of events that can be AV captured for recording and/or streaming and/or videoconferencing.
2. Description of Related Art
This invention is to all types of event capture but perhaps the most demanding is the capture of courtroom and deposition proceedings where the captured, recorder and/or streamed and/or videoconferenced record is often an “official” record, demanding perhaps the highest quality of all event capture. Litigation of any sort in the United Stated is widely considered too expensive and too slow to reach resolution. Generally, the legal industry has been slow to adopt technology to improve productivity and increase access. Electronic filing of pleadings and motions is becoming more commonplace. However, the legal industry's use of what little video it now deploys is largely inefficient. For example, it is not uncommon for some courtrooms that have begun using video to have separate cameras for making (1) an official record, (2) security, and (3) videoconferencing, thus resulting in duplication, financial waste and needless complexity. In another example, a deposition where all available legal technology is deployed, separate rather than integrated systems are typically brought in for (1) making the video of the deposition, (2) videoconferencing in a witness or attorney at a remote site, and (3) evidence presentation (systems occasionally used in trial but rarely during depositions). Moreover, shorthand stenographic equipment may also be brought in to make yet another record. Some stenographers have hardware and software allowing the text transcript itself to be fed in real-time for viewing by parties on and off site.
Most depositions today are still recorded by stenographic court reporters who make the record in shorthand, often with the aid of computer-aided-transcription (CAT) machines (steno keypads connected to a computer and special software). A lesser number of those stenographic reporters are also trained and equipped to offer real-time reporting, i.e., their computers output real-time transcriptions of what is being said to attorneys' and judges' laptops during depositions, hearings and trials.
A minority of depositions today are videotaped, despite the fact that a video record is more accurate and cheaper to make than a stenographic record. In addition, a video deposition is a much better tool for hearings and trials because the body language of the deponent is visible and the inflection in the responses can be heard. Such nuances are typically lost when only a stenographic record is available. It is also typically the case that when depositions are captured on video, it is in addition to, rather than in lieu of, stenographic reporting, despite the fact that federal and many state rules permit electronic instead of stenographic recording. This represents needless duplication and expense for clients.
Some trials are considered “paperless.” The term “paperless trial” describes the electronic presentation of evidence on courtroom displays rather than on paper. A paperless trial does not mean the complete absence of paper or that digital documents are never used in a paper trial. Rather, in a paperless trial as of this writing, electronic methods are the primary method of storing and showing exhibits with paper as a supplement or backup, e.g., exhibit binders, or available on-demand via a printer. Experts would generally agree that the digital presentation of evidence during trials can dramatically cut trial time, perhaps by as much as a third. The same would hold true with other legal proceedings, such as depositions.
Almost no depositions taken today are paperless and, thus, do not feature the digital presentation of evidence, e.g., documents, timelines, photos, charts and video clips. Most exhibits are usually copies of documents, shown to the deponent in paper format. Occasionally, charts and diagrams might be displayed on an easel or whiteboard, paper photos might be shown, and video might be played from a conventional video cassette recorder (VCR) and associated monitor. Interestingly, more and more discovery documents are either generated or stored as digital documents only to be printed back to paper for depositions and trials.
The use of edited deposition video testimony instead of live witnesses during a trial occurs very infrequently. It may be the case that if more depositions were video recorded, and if more witnesses appeared electronically in trial (digital testimony, edited down to essential testimony), trial duration might be cut even further, in addition to time savings through paperless evidence presentation.
Most depositions in the United States are manually, stenographically recorded as text-only by court reporters. Conventional video cameras and tape decks (occasionally with CD or DVD digital backup) are used to record the relatively few depositions that are conventional video-recorded depositions. A mere fraction of those video recorded depositions use additional equipment to stream the signal in real time (live) for viewing at remote sites. When streamed, which is rare, most often only the video and audio of the deponent (the so-called talking head) is streamed live and not the exhibits. The exhibits are usually faxed, mailed or emailed before the proceeding takes place and viewed during the proceeding on paper or digitally on a second display or window separate from the deponent's display. If both the deponent video and exhibits are streamed simultaneously—a rare occurrence—the two are usually transmitted on separate channels and are displayed, in separate windows or on separate screens at the remote site. For example, conventional transmission of deponent video and exhibit video might be displayed on two screens (see FIG. 4A), a split screen (see FIG. 4B), tiled (picture-in-picture, see FIG. 4C), or a three window version for displaying (1) the talking head, (2) the exhibits and (3) scrolling text of the deposition from a stenographer (see FIG. 4D). Note that some software tools tailored to the legal industry for video deposition playback, add that third window to include scrolling text of the deposition. Examples of such software tools for video depositions that have this or a similar feature include: DepositionDirector™, available from in Data Corporation, Gilbert, Ariz., and Visionary Viewer™, available from Visionary Legal Technologies, Dallas, Tex. The two-channel transmission of conventional video depositions is obviously more expensive than a single video feed, adds to the complexity of setup and use, and is displayed in disjointed fashion at the end point, requiring viewers' eyes to dart back and forth among windows.
Thus, it would be highly advantageous to have a method or system wherein the deponent is positioned next to a display which is simultaneously viewable by those on-site in the room and by anyone off-site watching via streamed video in real-time or afterwards, on demand, via a recording. Furthermore, the combination of electronic document presentation and greater use of edited witness testimony could combine to cut the length of a typical trial.